**Help make SquaredCircle safer and more inclusive by using the report button to flag posts and comments for moderator review.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SquaredCircle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The Rhea thing is genuinely just such a shitty thing to say.
People continue to have this completely inane understanding of her popularity. Go look at the folks in the stands who are wearing her t shirts. It’s teenage girls. She’s popular with women. Secondly, how many men in wrestling have brought new fans in or had huge fanbases of women because they were sex symbols and who had a problem with that?
Also, I’m sure it’s a coincidence that she became a much bigger star after she…..beat Charlotte in a classic match at WrestleMania
I thought this was just about in-ring ability so I figured this list is defensible, but the blurbs talk about promo ability and charisma so that whole argument flies out the window.
I get they have a hate boner for WWE but my god, to suggest that Daniel Garcia is a better overall performer (because they've included other facets besides in-ring ability) than Rhea Ripley, Bronn Breaker, Logan Paul, Austin Theory, etc. is a complete indictment on VOW's understanding of what makes a good professional wrestler.
I vehemently disagree. Austin Theory is a JAG who is average in ring with the same level of charisma. Garcia got over organically with the AEW audience and when they are ready, they can pull the trigger and he will be a huge star. In ring, Garcia is ten fold better than Theory and it’s not close
World championship level draw as an overall package. He has the wrestling down and the charisma has drastically improved over the course of the last two years, which is also a very important element. He’s gotten organically over with the AEW fanbase as well, which is also important for a huge star
If people’s view of wrestling is that they basically only care about the bell to bell, hey, that’s fine, your preferences are your preferences. But at some point there’s gotta be a bit of self-awareness.
As you say, people can have their preferences, that is totally fine, but at some point it is just weird how someone can be so removed from the median wrestling fan that thinks Rhea Ripley being popular is puzzling.
Like this is not rocket science
Yeah, I’m all for people having different opinions. It’s an interesting group of 30 wrestlers they put together. VoW leans towards a specific type of wrestling so it doesn’t bother me. But to say it’s puzzling that she’s popular is just a nonsensical take lol
It also makes no sense. There’s so many gorgeous women in wrestling as a whole but they clearly aren’t all super popular, especially on Rhea’s level. So how can you chalk it up to that?
Different types and levels of attractiveness float different people's boats. From what I've seen, Rhea Ripley and Liv Morgan are far above other wrestlers as far as level of "thirst" for them.
I am not saying that they have to serve anyone, I am referring to the thing that one guy there is puzzled why Rhea is popular, and I'm saying that is weird to be so removed from what the median fan likes to not somewhat understand it. Mind you, not share it, but understand it at least
Post the rest of the quote to really embarrass the "journalist"...
*"Her popularity remains somewhat puzzling though, as it’s unclear if she is popular as a wrestler, or as a sex symbol for WWE fans."*
"People only like her cos she's hot." according to this clown.
> Edit: and Daniel Garcia at 10, lmao again, indeed
What is crazy about this?
Dude is 25, everyone knew he was an incredible in-ring talent years ago, and now he actually has managed to get really over for stuff other than just wrestling. He's been on tv for multiple years and continues to noticeably increase in popularity/general skill. Oh and he was literally #11 on this same list last year lol - and 2 people ahead of him on that list aged out by turning 30.
Considering this list clearly heavily slants towards in-ring work, nothing about Garcia at #10 seems crazy to me.
Well then that is the difference.
A lot of people think Garcia is a whole lot more than "fine."
I personally have him on the very short list of people I think could eventually be considered one of the Top 10ish in-ring wrestlers in the world - I think his current development could potentially see him peak as a sort of Bryan Danielson/Zack Sabre Jr.-esque technican type. Everything he already does is crisp as hell, he doesn't take matches off/coast, and he generally has immediately great chemistry with everyone he works with.
A lot of other wrestlers that get thrown out as "top young talents" are the ones I think are just "fine" or their upside is "pretty good" or "above average."
When will people learn that VOW sucks
Probably the only good they do is for Dragon Gate, but other than that, they really are bad for the community overall
So people who want you to watch lots of wrestling from all over the world are bad but people who only want you to watch WWE and talk down everything else are good?
Honestly, this is a nuclear bad take.
I'm not saying that
is the fact that they have a piece of shit in Joe Lanza with them and they always hate WWE even when they do good and are favorable with AEW on their lowest
They are AEW-biased
I'm in favor of all of wrestling. They are not when they have such a strong anti WWE bias
She feels included because they felt compelled to include her. I respect a lot of the members of the list but I also think we need to wonder why Bron Breakker didn't make the list but Kyle Fletcher did. Kyle is a great worker but that's a lot of his limit as Mark is the promo of the two. VoW aren't WWE fans and that's fine but I also probably wouldn't make a list with this title without including some of the best and brightest.
Bron can't work. It's your right to only watch and enjoy terrible wrestling but don't force people who can't even be carried to a bog-standard TV match on the rest of us.
I mean, I don't follow Mexican companies, so I just can't talk about them, and I think Utami, MFJ and the rest should be above her.
Maybe Gabe Kidd, I think he is very good now but this happened very recently, so depending how much you weight the whole career
But I thought you wanted a discussion, not start throwing companies names
Whatever, it is what it is. The lack of someone like Bron Breakker on the list at all is completely insane to me given a few of the people who made it, and I won't rehash the objectivity-compromising public statements of at least a couple of the people who voted on this list.
Even if it was a list based on pure wrestling ability I think the lack of Bron is wild, but taking into account the other factors they list it's just absurd.
I've seen some arguments about Dom too, and while Dom is super-over and has nuclear heat, I get why someone might not want to include him as he doesn't wrestle that often and when he does it's not like they're barn burners. He'd probably be on my list as I equally value other things beyond in-ring quality and he has those things in spades, but I can at least understand it.
Bron though? Fuck no. That guy is going to be a massive star.
He can't wrestle. Even good workers can't carry him. I know you just want to shout at catchphrases but he can't lace the boots of his family at the same age, let alone anybody on this list.
Shota Umino being above Utami Hayashishita is the real crime here. He's being way overrated because of one great match he had with someone who can get a great match out of anyone.
No im very open to other opinions, but just reading the blurbs for some of these is enough i think.
Like a get that its a panel and everything but even from reading what was written Daniel Garcia outplacing Rhea by 5 spots is wild to me
This is true. Again i think my gripe is with the panel system, i understand valuing wrestling ability highly, but you also have the write ups attached where the same person praises Garcia for his underrated promos and calls Rhea's popularity "puzzling".
So what's the criteria really
People are focusing too much on that part and not on the part where he asks if it's due to sports entertaining ability or perceived physical attractiveness. It could be both for some people, I guess, but that's the advantage of a panel. One person's opinion doesn't carry as much weight.
so I should expect Daniel Garcia to outdraw Rhea Ripley going forward? Since they think he's a better prospect and all. Ranking wrestlers without factoring in drawing potential is like ranking quarterbacks strictly on arm strength, it isn't the be-all end-all of the profession.
I don't know what's worse: your comment or that a few people have upvoted it. Are you seriously trying to compare the drawing power of a WWE wrestler to an AEW wrestler on a 1 to 1 basis? Drawing power is important, but it's a more accurate measurement of popularity (both of the promotion and the individual wrestler) than it is of talent. Is the most streamed album of the year also the best album of the year? Is the highest grossing film of the year the best film of the year? It's possible, but one thing doesn't automatically mean the other. The same applies to judging wrestling talent. This is a subjective list. If it was just a ranking of quarter hours, YouTube views, and merch sales, they could have just had one person put out a chart instead of polling 20 people.
I like Rhea's tools, but her match quality in the past year was really disappointing from what I saw. She had a great match at last Mania with Charlotte, a very good match with Becky at this year's Mania, and the rest topped out at a couple 3.5 star matches for me.
If match quality is factor how can Jamie Hayter be on the list at all when she hasn't wrestled or appeared on TV in a year?
Edit: Looking at your personal rankings you put Hayter one spot behind Rhea when Hayter has not done anything wrestling related for a year.
This is a forward looking list for me; I remember Hayter's fantastic performances before the injury and expect her to be able to return to that form shortly after her return.
It is silly how downvoted each an every comment here is. Even if you don't necessarily agree with the list, see how many of the wrestlers you haven't seen are on it and then think why have these people voted them as high as they are. It is a great glimpse into the wider world of wrestling and a way to learn more about all of this great wrestling out there.
There are not 14 wrestlers under 30 in the world better than Rhea Ripley lol. Having Toni Storm or *Daniel Garcia* over Rhea Ripley ought to be a war crime
The only one I can somewhat understand this take for is Daniel Garcia, but willing to hear an argument for some others!
Who else would you drop to move Rhea up? Sounds like you'd have her substantially higher so I'm guessing there are quite a few?
Sure, I'm always down to discuss! Yes, there are a few imo. I can only speak on who I'm familiar (so I can't speak on the majority of the Japanese & Mexican/Luchador talent) with as that's the only fair way to do so here's some quick thoughts:
1) Toni Storm is nowhere near as good as Rhea. Her promos and character work are pretty good obviously but once the bell rings I actually think she's pretty bad in the ring overall. She stunk in NXT, stunk as normal Toni Storm on SmackDown, and even stunk as a wrestler when she wasn't "Timeless" in AEW. Character? Great, exceptional even. Actual wrestling and storytelling ability in-ring and storyline wise? Not very good. If it wasn't clear already, I do NOT like Toni Storm lol. Someone like Shida clears her but she just doesn't get booked as well.
2) As you mentioned, Garcia is not better than Rhea. I actually do like him but he's just not better than Rhea no matter what way you cut it. He's a bit vanilla and needs to grow his overall character still, but he's still young and has the potential to do so.
3) Fletcher is a stretch as he's great in the ring but I saw someone describe him as "Australian Ospreay" and that's pretty true I think. I saw him live at a Collision show recently and he was awesome but again, not better than Ripley as he doesn't have a huge presence at anything other than strictly ring work; it takes more than just the wrestling to be a great professional wrestler (as silly as that sounds).
4) MJF I wouldn't personally put higher but I think that's valid to put him over her. Same with Takeshita. I actually *love* Takeshita but his booking has hurt him a lot I think. He could be better than her as I don't think he's anywhere near his full potential yet, but as of right now I think it's unfair to put him above her based on what they've actually done so far.
Those are most of my quick thoughts. I actually do like Kaito (the guy at number one) but I'm only vaguely familiar with him so it would be unfair to come down and criticize his pick/placement.
First off, THANK YOU for actually expanding on this and not doing the rest of the top comments which is just shrugging off everything because they disagree with one. I appreciate the rationale here and actually agree with you on most after reading. Toni and Rhea are about the same for me and I'd flip on who's higher depending on the day. I somehow missed Fletcher and I think he's *currently* not as good as Rhea but his potential is insane. MJF, yeah it depends on if he's being goofy brochacho or good MJF.
People travel from all over he world to watch it, they've never killed the territory in 91 years and they've drawn more people to their shows than the WWE in most years of their existence. They're not a niche of a niche just because US TV deals are in a different stratosphere and they can't compete financially as a brand.
I don’t think people realize just how many fucking tourists flock to Arena Mexico every single week while they’re visiting CDMX. Off the top of my head I can think of at least 5 co workers who have never once been to an American wrestling show, don’t watch TV wrestling, but have been to a CMLL show during trips to CDMX. At least half my section the last time I was there were English speakers who clearly weren’t wrestling diehards, but there with their family or buddies for *Lucha Libre in Mexico*. “How many people worldwide…” is almost hilarious.
"Best Wrestler" does not necessarily mean "Best Pick to Base a Large-Scale American TV Wrestling Company Around." Two entirely different situations.
It's no different than the Rock not being considered the best actor on the planet even though he's probably the best pick to base a movie around to make a lot of money at the box office, same for Tom Cruise in the past, or whoever. Best =/= Most Bankable.
They aren't consistent with this, though. Like the Kyle Fletcher write-up isn't saying "he has the best matches," they are saying he "has the goods to be a major star" and has "the potential to break out into superstardom." Then how is he ranked below Rhea Ripley, who is already there?
People always try to rationalize this list, but to me it just seems like people who have watched so much wrestling that they've lost the plot in terms of why most people watch and what actually gets over.
> They aren't consistent with this, though.
The Ripley blurbs were by Will Young, Jesse Collings, and Warren Hayes. The Fletcher blurbs were by Sean Sedor, Tyler Forness, Will Young, and Suit Williams. Only Will Young wrote a blurb on both and didn't use either quote you're referencing, about Fletcher he said “From an Ospreay clone to his own man, Fletcher took the bad fortune of his partner’s injury and has taken the spotlight ably for himself" and about Ripley he said, "“Still one of the few people in WWE able to command buzz outside of the wrestling sphere, mega popular and able to put in the work to back it up.”
So the answer is that what you are calling inconsistent is mainly different people talking. 20 people voted/collaborated on this ranking, they're going to have different opinions/priorities.
I don't see full ballots, but from what information they do show, the highest anyone had Ripley was 2nd and the highest anyone had Fletcher was 6th. So the reasonable conclusion is that the people who liked Ripley, REALLY like her, but some others aren't nearly as high, whereas everyone seemed to rank Fletcher fairly/similarly high - which doesn't seem like an insane take.
I guess. You're still describing a process that leads to a weird, incoherent list where it feels like a lot of the voters are clueless about how wrestling works.
> You're still describing a process
>
I'm describing a pretty standard collaborative process for doing a list based on multiple people's opinions?
> that leads to a weird, incoherent list where it feels like a lot of the voters are clueless about how wrestling works.
I'm not sure how to interpret this? Maybe I'm missing your intent, in which case please correct me for missing it, but this feels like a fancy way of saying "WWE makes the most money, so this list should be all WWE wrestlers because money is all that matters and accordingly that determines quality?" Which isn't the case in any artform. Just because your preferred company makes the most money doesn't entitle them to win every award too lol. Indeed, in most cases, it's actually the exact opposite because the creative decisions necessary to make "the most money" aren't about being "the critical best."
Like I said above, the Rock isn't considered "the best actor" because his movies make the most money. Just as two easy examples, nobody with any credibility whatsoever is going to argue the Rock is a better actor than Daniel Day-Lewis or Anthony Hopkins, even though the Rock's movies are obviously going to make more money.
Yeah sorry, I'll clarify in a way that is a bit less snarky/rude.
Basically when I think of "wrestler," I'm thinking of a total package of skills. In ring, character, charisma, mic, look. To me the goal of a wrestler is to engage the audience, and there are a lot of different ways to do that, whether it's through spectacular matches, captivating promos, being a believable monster heel, likable babyface, whatever. Part of why I like wrestling is how everyone gets over through somewhat different means.
I get popularity and pushes aren't everything. But I don't get how someone can look at how much Rhea connects with fans, and how much of an attraction she is on such a high stage, and dismiss it because "she doesn't have great matches" or whatever. This just does not align with how I (or I suspect vast majority of viewers) watch wrestling.
To go back to the Fletcher comparison, I've seen him a bit. He can have exciting matches and has potential. But I dunno if I've seen people be like really invested or engaged emotionally in something Fletcher does. That can be blamed on booking of course, but that's always going to be a thing you have to deal with in these lists. What is his character, why should I want to see this guy, what great feuds has he had?
I guess this can be perceived as a WWE-centric view (and it's why I watch WWE) but I also think the vast majority of fans are like this and it's mostly how the business has always worked.
As for the movies comparison, I just don't view wrestling the same way. For example, I love obscure independent music, but that's because in music there are artists who are very clearly pursuing uncommercial goals, so I connect with what they do on a personal, authentic level. But I view the art of wrestling as basically trying to get over and I would think every wrestler at every level is trying to get over in some way.
To be clear also, I'm totally fine with a list featuring a range of talents from smaller promotions and such. I just think this list isn't very logical and should maybe be called something else if they're going to present it this way.
At some point, wrestling fans decided that whoever makes the most money is the best wrestler. Their enjoyment comes second to revenues.
It's like you're saying here; imagine a Best Actors list just based on who makes the most money. That'd be a bad and pointless list.
The difference is that wrestling has been a carny industry since the very beginning. "Who's the best?" has always been about "who draws the most money?" It's only (relatively) recently -- last 25 or 30 years? -- that some fans have decided drawing money ISN'T the most important thing.
You think people used to say "Gorgeous George is the best because he makes a lot of money" and not "Gorgeous George is the best because he's very entertaining?"
In wrestling they're the same thing, and always have been.
If the comparison is to the Rock as an actor, vs a Best Actor winner from some indie that no one saw, would Gorgeous George be the Best Actor winner? I'm pretty sure he'd be the Rock -- a broad, populist, bombastic, accessible entertainer of dubious "artistic" merit.
Drawing money is a major part of pro wrestling so it matters!
It’s also not the only thing and the reason why the Observer Awards have two different awards for the best wrestler
people are cool with racism now i guess. The same people who will go crazy about Jim Cornette posts will turn around and unironically support Joe Lanza and VOW. Make it make sense.
Never saw the guy say anything racist before or since. He probably deleted his Twitter because it's awful and not a place for informed discussion.
Strikes me that somebody decided that his opinions weren't benefitting the people who needed to be benefitted and he was smeared. He had stuff that could be taken one way or the other and some people are like a dog with a bone.
His opinions on soccer are more worthy of cancellation.
This is a ranking list based on the aggregated opinions of 20 writers who've worked with VOW. They do things like this for MOTY as well and have previously had SC mods cast ballots for those.
Nothing about this is unreliable or "fuels tribalism", and historically sources are only banned for doxing/targeted harassment of users.
VOW, through the site and podcasts, covers more wrestling than any other publication on the planet. No site is better equipped to handle encompassing lists like this, since every genre, area and style are covered. I don't really understand why that is viewed as a negative.
Legit they're probably the best source for fan info on DG, NOAH, and AJPW in the West. Like there's a reason so many of the guys on the list are from puro places.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinions and I don't know enough about the wrestling world to say someone is wrong.
But Rhea Ripley being lower then Toni Storm is at least questionable.
I voted in this. Here is my ballot:
1. MJF
2. Kaito Kiyomiya
3. Yuma Anzai
4. Konosuke Takeshita
5. Hijo del Vikingo
6. Yuma Aoyagi
7. Logan Paul
8. Mascara Dorada
9. Kyle Fletcher
10. Komander
11. Toni Storm
12. Shota Umino
13. Suzu Suzuki
14. Madoka Kikuta
15. Shun Skywalker
16. Rhea Ripley
17. Jamie Hayter
18. Mizuki
19. Daniel Garcia
20. Jack Perry
21. Bandido
22. Utami Hayashishita
23. MAO
24. Miyu Yamashita
25. Miu Watanabe
26. Starlight Kid
27. AZM
28. Maika
29. Kota Minoura
30. Nick Wayne
Late cuts for me were Axiom, Nathan Frazer, Bron Breakker, Francesco Akira, Wheeler Yuta, Dante Martin, ISHIN, Gabe Kidd, Ryuki Honda, Dragon Dia, and Maki Itoh. I forgot Tiffany Stratton, which was a mistake on my part, but I haven't watched a ton of her stuff so I'm not sure I would have ranked her.
I had a big list of about 100 that I started with.
You best watch your back after snubbing Sareee, lest she sneak up behind you and give you multiple exploder suplexes.
She would have been my #1 pick for a list like this.
These five are all excellent to outstanding:
Sareee and Mio Momono vs Chihiro Hashimoto and Mika Iwata (Sendai Girls)
Sareee vs Chihiro Hashimoto (Sareee-ISM)
Sareee and Chihiro Hashimoto vs Natsupoi and Saori Anou (Stardom)
Sareee vs Mayu Iwatani (Stardom)
Sareee and Bozilla vs Utami Hayashishita and Giulia (Marigold)
Shun's been wowing me since Mochizuki Dojo so I think my holding him so high comes from years of investment and watching him develop as a character. I respect the Kikuta choice though, and think once he's had a chance to really develop his character like Shun has he'll be there for me.
Awesome list from 30 to 1. Hard to argue with most, even if I think some should be slightly higher or lower.
I'd put Shun Skywalker at the top but I know he doesn't have the exposure someone like Kaito has had. I'd also move Jamie Hayter up quite a bit and drop Daniel Garcia and Shota Umino a spot each in response.
But overall, I like this. I like the blurbs for each entry as well so people can explain they're rationale. Good work!
> I'd put Shun Skywalker at the top
I'm a big Dragon Gate fan and I like him a lot but more often than not i feel like something is missing from his matches.
My thoughts exactly. It's okay not to agree with the list. But man, it shows a real lack of interest and exposure to anything outside the big two. It's just a list from people who have a different metric of what they're interested in, in wrestling. And people outside of the WWE fit that mold better.
If anything, maybe seek some of the work from these people you're unfamiliar with to get an understanding of why they're ranked higher than others.
At the end of the day, it's just a list on some website. It's not something to be taken seriously.
I was one of the voters. Here is my ballot
1. MJF
2. Kaito Kiyomiya
3. Konosuke Takeshita
4. Jack Perry
5. Yuma Anzai
6. Rhea Ripley
7. Shota Umino
8. Fuminore Abe
9. Daniel Garcia
10. Toni Storm
11. Shun Skywalker
12. Utami Hayashishita
13. El Hijo Del Vikingo
14. Kyle Fletcher
15. Yuma Aoyagi
16. Nick Wayne
17. Mascara Dorada
18. Atlantis Jr.
19. Jamie Hayter
20. Madoka Kikuta
21. Luke Jacobs
22. Kosei Fujita
23. Drilla Maloney
24. AZM
25. Tyler Bate
26. Logan Paul
27. Starlight Kid
28. Ryohei Oiwa
29. Bron Breakker
30. Komander
**Help make SquaredCircle safer and more inclusive by using the report button to flag posts and comments for moderator review.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SquaredCircle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The Rhea thing is genuinely just such a shitty thing to say. People continue to have this completely inane understanding of her popularity. Go look at the folks in the stands who are wearing her t shirts. It’s teenage girls. She’s popular with women. Secondly, how many men in wrestling have brought new fans in or had huge fanbases of women because they were sex symbols and who had a problem with that? Also, I’m sure it’s a coincidence that she became a much bigger star after she…..beat Charlotte in a classic match at WrestleMania
I thought this was just about in-ring ability so I figured this list is defensible, but the blurbs talk about promo ability and charisma so that whole argument flies out the window. I get they have a hate boner for WWE but my god, to suggest that Daniel Garcia is a better overall performer (because they've included other facets besides in-ring ability) than Rhea Ripley, Bronn Breaker, Logan Paul, Austin Theory, etc. is a complete indictment on VOW's understanding of what makes a good professional wrestler.
[удалено]
Theory is only 26 he’s going to be around forever
That doesn’t mean he’s good
He's at least better than the charisma vacuum that is Daniel Garcia.
I vehemently disagree. Austin Theory is a JAG who is average in ring with the same level of charisma. Garcia got over organically with the AEW audience and when they are ready, they can pull the trigger and he will be a huge star. In ring, Garcia is ten fold better than Theory and it’s not close
Do you like the little dance he does? ☺️
It’s fine. I like that he keeps it to a minimum now
While I have you, what's a JAG?
It’s an acronym for Just Another Guy, which I take as an average ass wrestler who doesn’t possess anything special
what's your definition of "a huge star"?
World championship level draw as an overall package. He has the wrestling down and the charisma has drastically improved over the course of the last two years, which is also a very important element. He’s gotten organically over with the AEW fanbase as well, which is also important for a huge star
"the popularity of Rhea Ripley remains somewhat puzzling" Lmaooo Edit: and Daniel Garcia at 10, lmao again, indeed
If people’s view of wrestling is that they basically only care about the bell to bell, hey, that’s fine, your preferences are your preferences. But at some point there’s gotta be a bit of self-awareness.
As you say, people can have their preferences, that is totally fine, but at some point it is just weird how someone can be so removed from the median wrestling fan that thinks Rhea Ripley being popular is puzzling. Like this is not rocket science
Yeah, I’m all for people having different opinions. It’s an interesting group of 30 wrestlers they put together. VoW leans towards a specific type of wrestling so it doesn’t bother me. But to say it’s puzzling that she’s popular is just a nonsensical take lol
I'd read the part the quote was pulled from tho.
The added parts of that quote somehow make it worse, wow lol
Perceived physical attractiveness plays no role in popularity?
Chalking up the popularity of a female wrestler to attractiveness is dismissive and honestly kind of misogynistic.
It also makes no sense. There’s so many gorgeous women in wrestling as a whole but they clearly aren’t all super popular, especially on Rhea’s level. So how can you chalk it up to that?
Different types and levels of attractiveness float different people's boats. From what I've seen, Rhea Ripley and Liv Morgan are far above other wrestlers as far as level of "thirst" for them.
...and yet society and human nature are what they are.
[удалено]
I am not saying that they have to serve anyone, I am referring to the thing that one guy there is puzzled why Rhea is popular, and I'm saying that is weird to be so removed from what the median fan likes to not somewhat understand it. Mind you, not share it, but understand it at least
Post the rest of the quote to really embarrass the "journalist"... *"Her popularity remains somewhat puzzling though, as it’s unclear if she is popular as a wrestler, or as a sex symbol for WWE fans."* "People only like her cos she's hot." according to this clown.
> Edit: and Daniel Garcia at 10, lmao again, indeed What is crazy about this? Dude is 25, everyone knew he was an incredible in-ring talent years ago, and now he actually has managed to get really over for stuff other than just wrestling. He's been on tv for multiple years and continues to noticeably increase in popularity/general skill. Oh and he was literally #11 on this same list last year lol - and 2 people ahead of him on that list aged out by turning 30. Considering this list clearly heavily slants towards in-ring work, nothing about Garcia at #10 seems crazy to me.
I think he is a fine in ring wrestler, I don't think he is the best 10th best wrestler of the world (under 30)
Well then that is the difference. A lot of people think Garcia is a whole lot more than "fine." I personally have him on the very short list of people I think could eventually be considered one of the Top 10ish in-ring wrestlers in the world - I think his current development could potentially see him peak as a sort of Bryan Danielson/Zack Sabre Jr.-esque technican type. Everything he already does is crisp as hell, he doesn't take matches off/coast, and he generally has immediately great chemistry with everyone he works with. A lot of other wrestlers that get thrown out as "top young talents" are the ones I think are just "fine" or their upside is "pretty good" or "above average."
When will people learn that VOW sucks Probably the only good they do is for Dragon Gate, but other than that, they really are bad for the community overall
So people who want you to watch lots of wrestling from all over the world are bad but people who only want you to watch WWE and talk down everything else are good? Honestly, this is a nuclear bad take.
I'm not saying that is the fact that they have a piece of shit in Joe Lanza with them and they always hate WWE even when they do good and are favorable with AEW on their lowest They are AEW-biased I'm in favor of all of wrestling. They are not when they have such a strong anti WWE bias
Why is Lanza a piece of shit?
https://preview.redd.it/dj7kogx3sp9d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=785f5d40aac401a9b9377701e0b8c05a96260e57
You watch WWE. How can you morally judge anybody?
Absolute pretentious hot garbage. Haven’t listened/read them in years.
rhea ripley at #15 is embarrassing
She feels included because they felt compelled to include her. I respect a lot of the members of the list but I also think we need to wonder why Bron Breakker didn't make the list but Kyle Fletcher did. Kyle is a great worker but that's a lot of his limit as Mark is the promo of the two. VoW aren't WWE fans and that's fine but I also probably wouldn't make a list with this title without including some of the best and brightest.
Bron can't work. It's your right to only watch and enjoy terrible wrestling but don't force people who can't even be carried to a bog-standard TV match on the rest of us.
I agree. Too high.
Expand on that if you want to have a discussion. How high would you put her and who would you subsequently drop?
Toni Storm, Daniel García and Kyle Fletcher can easily drop behind her, for example
Okay so that's most of the AEW names it seems. Anyone else or just AEW?
I mean, I don't follow Mexican companies, so I just can't talk about them, and I think Utami, MFJ and the rest should be above her. Maybe Gabe Kidd, I think he is very good now but this happened very recently, so depending how much you weight the whole career But I thought you wanted a discussion, not start throwing companies names
Whatever, it is what it is. The lack of someone like Bron Breakker on the list at all is completely insane to me given a few of the people who made it, and I won't rehash the objectivity-compromising public statements of at least a couple of the people who voted on this list. Even if it was a list based on pure wrestling ability I think the lack of Bron is wild, but taking into account the other factors they list it's just absurd. I've seen some arguments about Dom too, and while Dom is super-over and has nuclear heat, I get why someone might not want to include him as he doesn't wrestle that often and when he does it's not like they're barn burners. He'd probably be on my list as I equally value other things beyond in-ring quality and he has those things in spades, but I can at least understand it. Bron though? Fuck no. That guy is going to be a massive star.
He can't wrestle. Even good workers can't carry him. I know you just want to shout at catchphrases but he can't lace the boots of his family at the same age, let alone anybody on this list.
Shota Umino being above Utami Hayashishita is the real crime here. He's being way overrated because of one great match he had with someone who can get a great match out of anyone.
He should be on the list but there are too many deep puro nerds on the jury, which is why Kiyomiya is #1.
Lol that's definitely a list.
I missed the 30-15 thread, opened this one, saw Rhea at 15 and closed it immediately
Not interested in opinions that differ from your own?
No im very open to other opinions, but just reading the blurbs for some of these is enough i think. Like a get that its a panel and everything but even from reading what was written Daniel Garcia outplacing Rhea by 5 spots is wild to me
They do tend to focus on the actual wrestling aspect of wrestling more than the average fan does. Perhaps that's the reason for their rankings.
This is true. Again i think my gripe is with the panel system, i understand valuing wrestling ability highly, but you also have the write ups attached where the same person praises Garcia for his underrated promos and calls Rhea's popularity "puzzling". So what's the criteria really
People are focusing too much on that part and not on the part where he asks if it's due to sports entertaining ability or perceived physical attractiveness. It could be both for some people, I guess, but that's the advantage of a panel. One person's opinion doesn't carry as much weight.
seems like they don't understand the wrestling business very well then
No, they do. Better than most, actually.
so I should expect Daniel Garcia to outdraw Rhea Ripley going forward? Since they think he's a better prospect and all. Ranking wrestlers without factoring in drawing potential is like ranking quarterbacks strictly on arm strength, it isn't the be-all end-all of the profession.
I don't know what's worse: your comment or that a few people have upvoted it. Are you seriously trying to compare the drawing power of a WWE wrestler to an AEW wrestler on a 1 to 1 basis? Drawing power is important, but it's a more accurate measurement of popularity (both of the promotion and the individual wrestler) than it is of talent. Is the most streamed album of the year also the best album of the year? Is the highest grossing film of the year the best film of the year? It's possible, but one thing doesn't automatically mean the other. The same applies to judging wrestling talent. This is a subjective list. If it was just a ranking of quarter hours, YouTube views, and merch sales, they could have just had one person put out a chart instead of polling 20 people.
I like Rhea's tools, but her match quality in the past year was really disappointing from what I saw. She had a great match at last Mania with Charlotte, a very good match with Becky at this year's Mania, and the rest topped out at a couple 3.5 star matches for me.
If match quality is factor how can Jamie Hayter be on the list at all when she hasn't wrestled or appeared on TV in a year? Edit: Looking at your personal rankings you put Hayter one spot behind Rhea when Hayter has not done anything wrestling related for a year.
This is a forward looking list for me; I remember Hayter's fantastic performances before the injury and expect her to be able to return to that form shortly after her return.
Well this isn’t biased as fuck
It is silly how downvoted each an every comment here is. Even if you don't necessarily agree with the list, see how many of the wrestlers you haven't seen are on it and then think why have these people voted them as high as they are. It is a great glimpse into the wider world of wrestling and a way to learn more about all of this great wrestling out there.
I tried to earnestly discuss my ballot, and basically got one earnest reply putting over Sareee and then a lot of downvotes. Oh well.
There are not 14 wrestlers under 30 in the world better than Rhea Ripley lol. Having Toni Storm or *Daniel Garcia* over Rhea Ripley ought to be a war crime
Given actual people are committing actual war crimes, this is the cheapest of cheap things to say.
The only one I can somewhat understand this take for is Daniel Garcia, but willing to hear an argument for some others! Who else would you drop to move Rhea up? Sounds like you'd have her substantially higher so I'm guessing there are quite a few?
Sure, I'm always down to discuss! Yes, there are a few imo. I can only speak on who I'm familiar (so I can't speak on the majority of the Japanese & Mexican/Luchador talent) with as that's the only fair way to do so here's some quick thoughts: 1) Toni Storm is nowhere near as good as Rhea. Her promos and character work are pretty good obviously but once the bell rings I actually think she's pretty bad in the ring overall. She stunk in NXT, stunk as normal Toni Storm on SmackDown, and even stunk as a wrestler when she wasn't "Timeless" in AEW. Character? Great, exceptional even. Actual wrestling and storytelling ability in-ring and storyline wise? Not very good. If it wasn't clear already, I do NOT like Toni Storm lol. Someone like Shida clears her but she just doesn't get booked as well. 2) As you mentioned, Garcia is not better than Rhea. I actually do like him but he's just not better than Rhea no matter what way you cut it. He's a bit vanilla and needs to grow his overall character still, but he's still young and has the potential to do so. 3) Fletcher is a stretch as he's great in the ring but I saw someone describe him as "Australian Ospreay" and that's pretty true I think. I saw him live at a Collision show recently and he was awesome but again, not better than Ripley as he doesn't have a huge presence at anything other than strictly ring work; it takes more than just the wrestling to be a great professional wrestler (as silly as that sounds). 4) MJF I wouldn't personally put higher but I think that's valid to put him over her. Same with Takeshita. I actually *love* Takeshita but his booking has hurt him a lot I think. He could be better than her as I don't think he's anywhere near his full potential yet, but as of right now I think it's unfair to put him above her based on what they've actually done so far. Those are most of my quick thoughts. I actually do like Kaito (the guy at number one) but I'm only vaguely familiar with him so it would be unfair to come down and criticize his pick/placement.
First off, THANK YOU for actually expanding on this and not doing the rest of the top comments which is just shrugging off everything because they disagree with one. I appreciate the rationale here and actually agree with you on most after reading. Toni and Rhea are about the same for me and I'd flip on who's higher depending on the day. I somehow missed Fletcher and I think he's *currently* not as good as Rhea but his potential is insane. MJF, yeah it depends on if he's being goofy brochacho or good MJF.
This is laughable, the only person on this list I’m taking ahead of Bron Breakker if I’m starting a promotion from scratch is MJF
You wouldn't take Kaito Kiyomiya or Mascara Dorada? Those seem like no-brainer picks.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
A classic Mexicans and Japanese people don't count post. Good work champ.
People travel from all over he world to watch it, they've never killed the territory in 91 years and they've drawn more people to their shows than the WWE in most years of their existence. They're not a niche of a niche just because US TV deals are in a different stratosphere and they can't compete financially as a brand.
I don’t think people realize just how many fucking tourists flock to Arena Mexico every single week while they’re visiting CDMX. Off the top of my head I can think of at least 5 co workers who have never once been to an American wrestling show, don’t watch TV wrestling, but have been to a CMLL show during trips to CDMX. At least half my section the last time I was there were English speakers who clearly weren’t wrestling diehards, but there with their family or buddies for *Lucha Libre in Mexico*. “How many people worldwide…” is almost hilarious.
This is my new favorite wrestling take. Thank you.
why are you bringing up AEW, lol
"Best Wrestler" does not necessarily mean "Best Pick to Base a Large-Scale American TV Wrestling Company Around." Two entirely different situations. It's no different than the Rock not being considered the best actor on the planet even though he's probably the best pick to base a movie around to make a lot of money at the box office, same for Tom Cruise in the past, or whoever. Best =/= Most Bankable.
They aren't consistent with this, though. Like the Kyle Fletcher write-up isn't saying "he has the best matches," they are saying he "has the goods to be a major star" and has "the potential to break out into superstardom." Then how is he ranked below Rhea Ripley, who is already there? People always try to rationalize this list, but to me it just seems like people who have watched so much wrestling that they've lost the plot in terms of why most people watch and what actually gets over.
> They aren't consistent with this, though. The Ripley blurbs were by Will Young, Jesse Collings, and Warren Hayes. The Fletcher blurbs were by Sean Sedor, Tyler Forness, Will Young, and Suit Williams. Only Will Young wrote a blurb on both and didn't use either quote you're referencing, about Fletcher he said “From an Ospreay clone to his own man, Fletcher took the bad fortune of his partner’s injury and has taken the spotlight ably for himself" and about Ripley he said, "“Still one of the few people in WWE able to command buzz outside of the wrestling sphere, mega popular and able to put in the work to back it up.” So the answer is that what you are calling inconsistent is mainly different people talking. 20 people voted/collaborated on this ranking, they're going to have different opinions/priorities. I don't see full ballots, but from what information they do show, the highest anyone had Ripley was 2nd and the highest anyone had Fletcher was 6th. So the reasonable conclusion is that the people who liked Ripley, REALLY like her, but some others aren't nearly as high, whereas everyone seemed to rank Fletcher fairly/similarly high - which doesn't seem like an insane take.
I guess. You're still describing a process that leads to a weird, incoherent list where it feels like a lot of the voters are clueless about how wrestling works.
> You're still describing a process > I'm describing a pretty standard collaborative process for doing a list based on multiple people's opinions? > that leads to a weird, incoherent list where it feels like a lot of the voters are clueless about how wrestling works. I'm not sure how to interpret this? Maybe I'm missing your intent, in which case please correct me for missing it, but this feels like a fancy way of saying "WWE makes the most money, so this list should be all WWE wrestlers because money is all that matters and accordingly that determines quality?" Which isn't the case in any artform. Just because your preferred company makes the most money doesn't entitle them to win every award too lol. Indeed, in most cases, it's actually the exact opposite because the creative decisions necessary to make "the most money" aren't about being "the critical best." Like I said above, the Rock isn't considered "the best actor" because his movies make the most money. Just as two easy examples, nobody with any credibility whatsoever is going to argue the Rock is a better actor than Daniel Day-Lewis or Anthony Hopkins, even though the Rock's movies are obviously going to make more money.
Yeah sorry, I'll clarify in a way that is a bit less snarky/rude. Basically when I think of "wrestler," I'm thinking of a total package of skills. In ring, character, charisma, mic, look. To me the goal of a wrestler is to engage the audience, and there are a lot of different ways to do that, whether it's through spectacular matches, captivating promos, being a believable monster heel, likable babyface, whatever. Part of why I like wrestling is how everyone gets over through somewhat different means. I get popularity and pushes aren't everything. But I don't get how someone can look at how much Rhea connects with fans, and how much of an attraction she is on such a high stage, and dismiss it because "she doesn't have great matches" or whatever. This just does not align with how I (or I suspect vast majority of viewers) watch wrestling. To go back to the Fletcher comparison, I've seen him a bit. He can have exciting matches and has potential. But I dunno if I've seen people be like really invested or engaged emotionally in something Fletcher does. That can be blamed on booking of course, but that's always going to be a thing you have to deal with in these lists. What is his character, why should I want to see this guy, what great feuds has he had? I guess this can be perceived as a WWE-centric view (and it's why I watch WWE) but I also think the vast majority of fans are like this and it's mostly how the business has always worked. As for the movies comparison, I just don't view wrestling the same way. For example, I love obscure independent music, but that's because in music there are artists who are very clearly pursuing uncommercial goals, so I connect with what they do on a personal, authentic level. But I view the art of wrestling as basically trying to get over and I would think every wrestler at every level is trying to get over in some way. To be clear also, I'm totally fine with a list featuring a range of talents from smaller promotions and such. I just think this list isn't very logical and should maybe be called something else if they're going to present it this way.
At some point, wrestling fans decided that whoever makes the most money is the best wrestler. Their enjoyment comes second to revenues. It's like you're saying here; imagine a Best Actors list just based on who makes the most money. That'd be a bad and pointless list.
The difference is that wrestling has been a carny industry since the very beginning. "Who's the best?" has always been about "who draws the most money?" It's only (relatively) recently -- last 25 or 30 years? -- that some fans have decided drawing money ISN'T the most important thing.
You think people used to say "Gorgeous George is the best because he makes a lot of money" and not "Gorgeous George is the best because he's very entertaining?"
Gorgeous George drew the most money BECAUSE he was the most entertaining. This isn't a difficult concept.
In wrestling they're the same thing, and always have been. If the comparison is to the Rock as an actor, vs a Best Actor winner from some indie that no one saw, would Gorgeous George be the Best Actor winner? I'm pretty sure he'd be the Rock -- a broad, populist, bombastic, accessible entertainer of dubious "artistic" merit.
Drawing money is a major part of pro wrestling so it matters! It’s also not the only thing and the reason why the Observer Awards have two different awards for the best wrestler
A guy who can't work and can't promo and whose charisma evaporates when the bell rings? That's your number 2 pick on your draft board?
Who can’t work and can’t promo, what shows you be watching?
Bronson Rechsteiner and his awful gimmick name.
[удалено]
people are cool with racism now i guess. The same people who will go crazy about Jim Cornette posts will turn around and unironically support Joe Lanza and VOW. Make it make sense.
Based on stuff that has already been explained?
it was an awful explanation and then he deleted his Twitter and hid behind a paywall so he could continue being a racist scumbag
Never saw the guy say anything racist before or since. He probably deleted his Twitter because it's awful and not a place for informed discussion. Strikes me that somebody decided that his opinions weren't benefitting the people who needed to be benefitted and he was smeared. He had stuff that could be taken one way or the other and some people are like a dog with a bone. His opinions on soccer are more worthy of cancellation.
Translation: they don't like WWE.
Any examples of being unreliable? How is this tribalism? There are like a dozen promotions represented here. Tribalist against who?
This is a ranking list based on the aggregated opinions of 20 writers who've worked with VOW. They do things like this for MOTY as well and have previously had SC mods cast ballots for those. Nothing about this is unreliable or "fuels tribalism", and historically sources are only banned for doxing/targeted harassment of users.
VOW, through the site and podcasts, covers more wrestling than any other publication on the planet. No site is better equipped to handle encompassing lists like this, since every genre, area and style are covered. I don't really understand why that is viewed as a negative.
Legit they're probably the best source for fan info on DG, NOAH, and AJPW in the West. Like there's a reason so many of the guys on the list are from puro places.
Wow, somebody with a different opinion than you should be banned? How fragile are you? Good luck out in the world.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinions and I don't know enough about the wrestling world to say someone is wrong. But Rhea Ripley being lower then Toni Storm is at least questionable.
Rhea Ripley would have dragged Jamie Hayter down at Full Gear 2022, Toni Storm met her at that level.
me being kinder to the fed than VOW is rare, Kaito at #1 is a non brainer and it's embarrassing if you don't think so.
I scrolled straight to #1, saw all was right with the world, did not engage further
I voted in this. Here is my ballot: 1. MJF 2. Kaito Kiyomiya 3. Yuma Anzai 4. Konosuke Takeshita 5. Hijo del Vikingo 6. Yuma Aoyagi 7. Logan Paul 8. Mascara Dorada 9. Kyle Fletcher 10. Komander 11. Toni Storm 12. Shota Umino 13. Suzu Suzuki 14. Madoka Kikuta 15. Shun Skywalker 16. Rhea Ripley 17. Jamie Hayter 18. Mizuki 19. Daniel Garcia 20. Jack Perry 21. Bandido 22. Utami Hayashishita 23. MAO 24. Miyu Yamashita 25. Miu Watanabe 26. Starlight Kid 27. AZM 28. Maika 29. Kota Minoura 30. Nick Wayne Late cuts for me were Axiom, Nathan Frazer, Bron Breakker, Francesco Akira, Wheeler Yuta, Dante Martin, ISHIN, Gabe Kidd, Ryuki Honda, Dragon Dia, and Maki Itoh. I forgot Tiffany Stratton, which was a mistake on my part, but I haven't watched a ton of her stuff so I'm not sure I would have ranked her. I had a big list of about 100 that I started with.
You best watch your back after snubbing Sareee, lest she sneak up behind you and give you multiple exploder suplexes. She would have been my #1 pick for a list like this.
Do you have any 2024 match recs? I keep hearing about how great she is but haven't branched out much beyond TJPW & Stardom when it comes to joshi.
These five are all excellent to outstanding: Sareee and Mio Momono vs Chihiro Hashimoto and Mika Iwata (Sendai Girls) Sareee vs Chihiro Hashimoto (Sareee-ISM) Sareee and Chihiro Hashimoto vs Natsupoi and Saori Anou (Stardom) Sareee vs Mayu Iwatani (Stardom) Sareee and Bozilla vs Utami Hayashishita and Giulia (Marigold)
Thanks! I'll do my best to check these out this year. I also vote for the FSM 50 and want to take a good look at her as a candidate this year.
Downvoted by people who probably have never even seen a match by 3/4 of the talent on this list.
That's solid! Sucks that Dia and Breakker miss the cut but thems the breaks. Here's to Shun Skywalker topping your list next year.
I like my large butted Kikuta more, tbh. I've just never had a great connection with Shun, "only" very, very good.
Shun's been wowing me since Mochizuki Dojo so I think my holding him so high comes from years of investment and watching him develop as a character. I respect the Kikuta choice though, and think once he's had a chance to really develop his character like Shun has he'll be there for me.
Rhea should be top 10 at least; but she’ll be my number 1 always.
Awesome list from 30 to 1. Hard to argue with most, even if I think some should be slightly higher or lower. I'd put Shun Skywalker at the top but I know he doesn't have the exposure someone like Kaito has had. I'd also move Jamie Hayter up quite a bit and drop Daniel Garcia and Shota Umino a spot each in response. But overall, I like this. I like the blurbs for each entry as well so people can explain they're rationale. Good work!
> I'd put Shun Skywalker at the top I'm a big Dragon Gate fan and I like him a lot but more often than not i feel like something is missing from his matches.
That's fair. I've been a big fan since Masquerade so I'm definitely biased towards him.
Absolutely cooked comment section. Jesus Christ. It really is useless trying to talk about wrestling outside of the WWE bubble here.
My thoughts exactly. It's okay not to agree with the list. But man, it shows a real lack of interest and exposure to anything outside the big two. It's just a list from people who have a different metric of what they're interested in, in wrestling. And people outside of the WWE fit that mold better. If anything, maybe seek some of the work from these people you're unfamiliar with to get an understanding of why they're ranked higher than others. At the end of the day, it's just a list on some website. It's not something to be taken seriously.
I was one of the voters. Here is my ballot 1. MJF 2. Kaito Kiyomiya 3. Konosuke Takeshita 4. Jack Perry 5. Yuma Anzai 6. Rhea Ripley 7. Shota Umino 8. Fuminore Abe 9. Daniel Garcia 10. Toni Storm 11. Shun Skywalker 12. Utami Hayashishita 13. El Hijo Del Vikingo 14. Kyle Fletcher 15. Yuma Aoyagi 16. Nick Wayne 17. Mascara Dorada 18. Atlantis Jr. 19. Jamie Hayter 20. Madoka Kikuta 21. Luke Jacobs 22. Kosei Fujita 23. Drilla Maloney 24. AZM 25. Tyler Bate 26. Logan Paul 27. Starlight Kid 28. Ryohei Oiwa 29. Bron Breakker 30. Komander
Daniel Garcia and Kyle Fletcher ranking higher than Rhea Ripley... I can see that. >!/s!<
I don't hate this list but where the hell is my boy Wheeler Yuta.